I just got a letter in the mail from Oxford. They are writing to let me know my company's premiums are going up by 15.5% in the next cycle. It got me thinking about the whole way Obamacare was sold to the American people. Remember when Obama said that his healthplan would reduce premiums on family plans by an average of $2500 per family? How it would lower overall healthcare costs?

It was all smoke and mirrors and its framers knew it. When you sift through the garbage and distractions it all comes down to basic math. Here is the deal. We currently have 60 Million citizens (I hope they are citizens???) on Medicaid(http://www.medicaid.gov/index.html). That equals approximately 18% of the population or "the bottom 18%" of income earners. The approximate income threshold The range for individuals is typically $600-$800 and $1,000-$1,350 for couples (http://radix09.hubpages.com/hub/Medi...-Income-Limits). For the CHIP program (part of medicaid that covers children) the income thresholds are higher starting around $3000 per month for families and going up from there based on the number of children.

That is the baseline. There are approximately 25Million Americans today that don't have health insurance. This group obviously earns above the medicaid cutoff thresholds. In essence Obamacare shifts those people on to Medicaid effectively raising the thresholds to cover more people. Under Obamacare approximately 27% of Americans will get Medicaid up from 18%. That's it in a nutshel. It also subsidizes even more people with reduced cost coverage though the full scope of those numbers is not yet known.

Now in addition it is important to understand that 45 Million Americans are on Medicare. 45 Million Americans represent approximately 13% of the population. Add that to the Medicaid numbers and we have 40% of Americans recieving Government Medical Insurance in one form or another.

In its essence all Obamcare does is add more folks to the Government Free Insurance Plan. That's it. Yet it was sold as something that would drive down the cost of insurance? How does adding 30 Million people to Medicaid reduce the cost of insurance? Many of those 30Million are healthy younger people that choose not to buy insurance because its too damn expensive. Now Government giving them free insurance will drive down the costs? It is absurd.

To the peoples credit I don't think many people were stupid enough to believe what Obama was spewing on this one. When you break it down the math isn't that confusing. Even Democrats must have understood this so the question is: Why did they sell a plan that, at its core simply adds 30 Million people to Medicare, as something that would reduce the cost of insurance? The premise defies logic. Of course we know Obamacare carries a slew of new taxes carefully crafted to hit only long after the program is in full swing negating the ability to cancel it once people feel the hits to their wallets. Even with that according to recent estimates this program is in the hole for 2 trillion over the next 10 years and even larger holes in subsequent years. New taxes will need to be raised to cover those deficits. Considering we already are looking at 7-8 trillion deficits without Obamacare over the next 10 the additional 2 or 3 will just broaden the pain. Where will the money come from? Certainly not the 100Million or so people on Government insurance. It will come from the rest of the people that already pay in. We would need to double tax rates across the board to all tax payers to cover this.

Here is my problem with the whole thing in a nutshell. Why not sell the plan for what it is? Obama could have said that he wants to expand coverage to 30 Million more people under medicaid. He could have said that the cost of insuring so many people will be high but its the (IHO) right thing to do. People could have voted on it. Are you willing to pay a bit more in taxes to help out some folks that might not be able to afford insurance on their own?

Instead the literally lied. Said that they were coming up with a plan to make insurance more affordable. They said it would not increase the deficit and that rates would go down for the average family by $2500. All lies. Worse then the fact that they lied is that it is quite obvious that they KNOWINGLY lied.
they sold us a bill of goods to advance their universal healthcare agenda because to Progressives the ends justify the means.

06-25-2012, 02:49 PM

Warfish

I have no real doubt that the real intention of Obamcare was the gradual destruction of the faith and confidence in our private healtgcare/insurance system, in order to pave the way for a proper single-payer or Universal National Healthcare System a la the UK.

The same way I have no doubt that the core purpose of Operation Fast & Furious was to create political outrage and overwhelming pressure to ban assault weapons and support limiting gun rights.

The same way I have no doubt that the reason we not have the DREAM Act withotu actually passign the DREAM Act is to imcrease the vote count come November in a specific racial group of potential voters.

06-25-2012, 04:33 PM

chiefst2000

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warfish

I have no real doubt that the real intention of Obamcare was the gradual destruction of the faith and confidence in our private healtgcare/insurance system, in order to pave the way for a proper single-payer or Universal National Healthcare System a la the UK.

The same way I have no doubt that the core purpose of Operation Fast & Furious was to create political outrage and overwhelming pressure to ban assault weapons and support limiting gun rights.

The same way I have no doubt that the reason we not have the DREAM Act withotu actually passign the DREAM Act is to imcrease the vote count come November in a specific racial group of potential voters.

Everything you say here is true. For me I am more disturbed by the way these programs are sold. It seems like progressives know that the people wouldn't agree to their agenda if they are upfront about it. So they knowingly lie and sell these ideas and programs in a distorted way in their attempt to cram their agenda on to voters that would not agree if they were truthful. Obamacare was sold as a system which would reduce the costs of care. It was sold as something that would not add to the deficit. To their credit most people weren't fooled. But the larger picture of a political party that lies to the public in order to advance an agenda which they know voters won't support.

I would like to see the liberals take on this. Do they agree that the ends justify the means and progressive politicians are justified in lying and distortions to sell their unpopular agenda to the public?

06-25-2012, 04:41 PM

PlumberKhan

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warfish

... in order to pave the way for a proper single-payer or Universal National Healthcare System a la the UK.

That would be bad.

The UK leads the world heart disease, lung cancer and obesity.

Last time I went there, Heathrow runways were paved in dead bodies. People die so much there, they use corpses as building materials.

06-25-2012, 05:04 PM

FF2®

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefst2000

a political party that lies to the public in order to advance an agenda

I've never heard of such a thing. :eek:

06-25-2012, 05:29 PM

chiefst2000

Quote:

Originally Posted by FF2®

I've never heard of such a thing. :eek:

Why lie so blatantly? If you disagree that the sales pitch about Obamacare saving families $2500 in yearly premiums please present an argument to the contrary. Give me some inkling how someone could have been confused enough to actually believe this to be true. This is right in line with the refusal to pass or even present a real budget. The assumption is that voters are too stupid to judge opposing plans on their merits. We are talking about sweeping legislation. They sold it as something it is not.

Republicans often say that we believe that tax cuts can lead to higher revenue through increased growth. You may disagree but there is an argument to be made for both positions. There is some truth in both sides of that argument. There is no rational basis for saying that adding 30 million new people on to Medicaid saves money. How do they get away with this. Will no one here argue for Obama on this one?

06-25-2012, 05:37 PM

FF2®

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefst2000

Why lie so blatantly? If you disagree that the sales pitch about Obamacare saving families $2500 in yearly premiums please present an argument to the contrary. Give me some inkling how someone could have been confused enough to actually believe this to be true. This is right in line with the refusal to pass or even present a real budget. The assumption is that voters are too stupid to judge opposing plans on their merits. We are talking about sweeping legislation. They sold it as something it is not.

Republicans often say that we believe that tax cuts can lead to higher revenue through increased growth. You may disagree but there is an argument to be made for both positions. There is some truth in both sides of that argument. There is no rational basis for saying that adding 30 million new people on to Medicaid saves money. How do they get away with this. Will no one here argue for Obama on this one?

People lie because they like to get their way.

Like telling us they have proof of WMDs and thats why we need to go to war. Why not juts tell the real reason? (Maybe because they thought we were too stupid to understand it.) They sold it as something it wasn't... to make sure they got their way.

Please don't act shocked that politicians lie. I did not have a sexual relationship with that woman, read my lips!

06-25-2012, 05:46 PM

chiefst2000

Quote:

Originally Posted by FF2®

People lie because they like to get their way.

Like telling us they have proof of WMDs and thats why we need to go to war. Why not juts tell the real reason? (Maybe because they thought we were too stupid to understand it.) They sold it as something it wasn't... to make sure they got their way.

Please don't act shocked that politicians lie.

Iraq had WMD and used them in the past on the Kurds. There is no mystery there. Clinton, Kerry and virtually every other liberal Democrat agreed at the time. Another reason stated for the Iraq war was to plant the seed of democracy in the Middle East with the hope they could transform the region and inspire other countries to reach for Democracy. Fast forward 10 years and the you have Arab Spring. For better or worse the concept that the Bush people put forward came to fruition. You may or may not agree with the war but those were the justifications given. Most people agreed at the time.

I'm not shocked that politicians sometimes lie. They take positions for political expediency. I just haven't seen such blatant lies. There isn't even a kernel of truth to what they said about Obamacare. Worse still is that it is clear they KNOWINGLY lied about it. How do you go to the polls and pull the lever for someone that essentially pulled a fast one on you?

06-25-2012, 06:02 PM

brady's a catcher

Quote:

Originally Posted by PlumberKhan

That would be bad.

The UK leads the world heart disease, lung cancer and obesity.

Last time I went there, Heathrow runways were paved in dead bodies. People die so much there, they use corpses as building materials.

Is that GMC approved? :confused:

06-25-2012, 06:18 PM

cr726

This is revisionist bs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefst2000

Iraq had WMD and used them in the past on the Kurds. There is no mystery there. Clinton, Kerry and virtually every other liberal Democrat agreed at the time. Another reason stated for the Iraq war was to plant the seed of democracy in the Middle East with the hope they could transform the region and inspire other countries to reach for Democracy. Fast forward 10 years and the you have Arab Spring. For better or worse the concept that the Bush people put forward came to fruition. You may or may not agree with the war but those were the justifications given. Most people agreed at the time.

I'm not shocked that politicians sometimes lie. They take positions for political expediency. I just haven't seen such blatant lies. There isn't even a kernel of truth to what they said about Obamacare. Worse still is that it is clear they KNOWINGLY lied about it. How do you go to the polls and pull the lever for someone that essentially pulled a fast one on you?

06-25-2012, 06:20 PM

chiefst2000

Quote:

Originally Posted by cr726

This is revisionist bs.

Be specific. Give me one thing I said that is untrue.

06-25-2012, 06:27 PM

cr726

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefst2000

Be specific. Give me one thing I said that is untrue.

When was democracy ever used as a reason to invade Iraq? The WMD was absolute bs, especially when of your main sources of information is a nicknamed CURVEBALL. I had zero issues with the invasion of Afghanistan and to go to a 2nd war was outrageously dumb.

06-25-2012, 07:23 PM

FF2®

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefst2000

Be specific. Give me one thing I said that is untrue.

Seeds of Democracy? :rolleyes:

I missed that in Powell's adress to the U.N.

06-25-2012, 07:29 PM

CraigFL

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefst2000

Be specific. Give me one thing I said that is untrue.

Don't bother, just a typical liberal. I found they are blind to facts, deaf to logic, and mute to admission of mistakes.

06-25-2012, 08:21 PM

PlumberKhan

Quote:

Originally Posted by brady's a catcher

Is that GMC approved? :confused:

It's not, sadly.

Sent from my Double-Wide using Semaphore...

06-25-2012, 10:46 PM

OCCH

Quote:

Originally Posted by FF2®

Seeds of Democracy? :rolleyes:

I missed that in Powell's adress to the U.N.

WMDs is why we invaded.

"Seeds of democracy" is why we STAYED.

I still agree with the former, and disagree with the latter . . .

06-25-2012, 11:17 PM

chiefst2000

Quote:

Originally Posted by FF2®

Seeds of Democracy? :rolleyes:

I missed that in Powell's adress to the U.N.

The Bush people absolutely cited the benefits of planting a democracy squarely in the heart of the Middle East but I'm not trying to get into a debate about the merits of the Iraq war. What is with all the deflection? Obama sold Obamacare as something that would reduce premiums by $2500 a month. Premiums have been going up like crazy. They also said it wouldn't add to the deficit. Now it is looking like it will add trillions to the deficit. Obama sold us on spending 100+ billion to create 5 million new green energy jobs. The money is spent and no jobs. It was all lies to push a progressive agenda. Even liberals here can't defend it because it is clearly indefensible.

06-26-2012, 12:07 AM

cr726

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefst2000

The Bush people absolutely cited the benefits of planting a democracy squarely in the heart of the Middle East but I'm not trying to get into a debate about the merits of the Iraq war. What is with all the deflection? Obama sold Obamacare as something that would reduce premiums by $2500 a month. Premiums have been going up like crazy. They also said it wouldn't add to the deficit. Now it is looking like it will add trillions to the deficit. Obama sold us on spending 100+ billion to create 5 million new green energy jobs. The money is spent and no jobs. It was all lies to push a progressive agenda. Even liberals here can't defend it because it is clearly indefensible.

The Iraq war is defensible?

06-26-2012, 08:43 AM

chiefst2000

Quote:

Originally Posted by cr726

The Iraq war is defensible?

Of course it was defensible. Iraq attacked Kuwait and eventually lost a war of aggression that they had started when we stepped in to defend our ally in Kuwait. As part of the agreement to end that war Iraq agreed to regular inspections of their weapons programs. Once Saddam began blocking the inspector access he was in breach of the treaty. The war was justified on that alone. Like it or not that was justification enough.

06-26-2012, 09:52 AM

Winstonbiggs

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefst2000

they sold us a bill of goods to advance their universal healthcare agenda because to Progressives the ends justify the means.

Were your premiums going up above the rate of inflation before Obama care? Mine was. Wages in the US are stagnant relative to inflation which means health care costs were rising as both a percentage of GDP and as a percentage of people’s wages. In a nutshell more people would lose their health insurance if nothing was done on cost alone.

Is the Republican agenda out of control health care costs that benefit the few and a health care system that caters to less people?

The Obama plan is clearly flawed but so was the plan before Obama became President. It was the best he could do in the political climate we are under. Pretty crappy result and no doubt should be scrapped. The idea that Republicans have a better plan simply doesn't wash. They controlled the government and sat by while premiums went up and the population continued to age and did nothing. The suddenly became interested in modest reform when they lost elections and the entire debate changed.

Now even though the results suck, the progressive agenda doesn't suck at all. The concept of health care for all is very sound and as you rightly point out cost control is needed.

The concept that both sides have hung on to is the myth that those who have coverage can keep getting their own choices when costs are skyrocketing and as the population ages more care will be needed per person. Clearly both sides have to stop lying to us about nothing changing in the way health care is delivered. We are going to need massive changes.